USCRI Statement on the end of the so-called "Migrant Protection Protocols" - United States of America
- Bias Rating
36% Medium Conservative
- Reliability
N/AN/A
- Policy Leaning
44% Medium Conservative
- Politician Portrayal
20% Negative
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
Continue
Continue
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates. Already a member: Log inBias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
N/A
- Conservative
Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
---|---|---|
"This is a huge win for asylum seekers who have been living in desperation along the southern border for months and in some instances, years, USCRI CEO and President Eskinder Negash said." | Positive | 8% Conservative |
"We urge Congress to impede any changes to restrict access to asylum or keep the use of Title 42 in place indefinitely." | Negative | -2% Liberal |
"Today, the Supreme Court held in Biden v. Texas that the Government's rescission of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) -- a policy begun by the Trump administration that requires asylum seekers at the southern border to stay in Mexico while awaiting a hearing in U.S. immigration court -- did not violate current immigration law." | Negative | -6% Liberal |
"This momentum must continue in Congress where attempts to codify the use of Title 42 will again put the right to seek asylum at risk." | Negative | -34% Liberal |
"Today, the Supreme Court held in Biden v. Texas that the Government's rescission of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) -- a policy begun by the Trump administration that requires asylum seekers at the southern border to stay in Mexico while awaiting a hearing in U.S. immigration court -- did not violate current immigration law." | Positive | 2% Conservative |
"Today, the Supreme Court held in Biden v. Texas that the Government's rescission of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) -- a policy begun by the Trump administration that requires asylum seekers at the southern border to stay in Mexico while awaiting a hearing in U.S. immigration court -- did not violate current immigration law." | Positive | 2% Conservative |
"In short, the Supreme Court held that the Biden administration's decision to terminate MPP, or the Remain in Mexico policy, did not violate federal immigration law." | Negative | -14% Liberal |
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Contributing sentiments towards policy:
54% : "This is a huge win for asylum seekers who have been living in desperation along the southern border for months and in some instances, years," USCRI CEO and President Eskinder Negash said.49% : We urge Congress to impede any changes to restrict access to asylum or keep the use of Title 42 in place indefinitely.
47% : Today, the Supreme Court held in Biden v. Texas that the Government's rescission of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) -- a policy begun by the Trump administration that requires asylum seekers at the southern border to stay in Mexico while awaiting a hearing in U.S. immigration court -- did not violate current immigration law.
33% : "This momentum must continue in Congress where attempts to codify the use of Title 42 will again put the right to seek asylum at risk."
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.